Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vedsted, P.
Right arrow Articles by Olesen, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vedsted, P.
Right arrow Articles by Olesen, F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Family Practice, Vol 14, 199-203, Copyright © 1997 by World Organization of Family Doctors

ORIGINAL CLINICAL RESEARCH

Does a computerized price comparison module reduce prescribing costs in general practice?

P Vedsted, JN Nielsen and F Olesen
Research Unit for General Practice, University of Aarhus, Denmark.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the trends in prescribed defined daily doses (DDD) and drug expenses before and after the introduction of a computerized cost containment module into the computer record system of a defined group of GPs. The GPs' expectations for and experiences with the module were examined. METHOD: We performed a controlled follow-up study on antecedent data before and after intervention. A questionnaire was administered to the intervention group at the introduction and 1 year later. Data on prescribing were collected in the database of the Health Insurance Aarhus County, as a normal routine for accounting. The GPs were not aware of the ongoing cost supervision study. Additional cost information software was introduced on 1 January 1993 to 20 practices with 28 GPs. The software assisted the GPs in a semiautomatic way to identify and prescribe the cheapest drugs. The subjects comprised 158 practices including 231 GPs in Aarhus County, Denmark. Questionnaires were sent to the 20 intervention practices. The main outcome measures were prescribed DDD, reimbursement for prescribed drugs, and reimbursement per prescribed DDD quarterly during 1992 and 1993. RESULTS: Compared with the controls there were no changes in prescribed DDD, reimbursement for prescribed drugs, and reimbursement per prescribed DDD in the intervention group after the introduction of the module. CONCLUSION: Simply giving a random group of GPs computer assistance to choose less expensive drugs did not reduce expenditure per DDD. Cost containment procedures should be more intensive than just giving the doctors a computer-assisted decision aid.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.Home page
S. Eslami, A. Abu-Hanna, and N. F. de Keizer
Evaluation of Outpatient Computerized Physician Medication Order Entry Systems: A Systematic Review
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., July 1, 2007; 14(4): 400 - 406.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.